Nontoxic Control of Fleas, Termites : Poisoning Pests, Not People or Pets

When Maggie, a stray cat, moved into Bernice Lifton’s home, she also brought inside a contingent of fleas. Lifton did what many pet owners do--purchased flea control products and sprayed her household and the cat.

But her 12-year-old son’s eyes and lips puffed and swelled alarmingly because he suffered an allergic reaction to the flea products.

“This made me realize there had to be a better way, and I tried to find out how I could use less toxic methods to control the fleas,” Lifton said.

The episode occurred in 1981, when few nontoxic products were being sold. Lifton spent the next four years researching methods of combating pests. The result was her recently published book, “Bugbusters: Poison-Free Pest Controls for Your House and Garden.”

A nonprofit organization, Bio-Integral Resource Center (BIRC) in Berkeley, is also educating people on how to combat garden and household pests without relying on poisons. The founders, William and Helga Olkowski and Sheila Daar, are the authors of a 715-page book, “Common Sense Pest Control,” which explains how to combat outdoor and indoor pests by non-chemical means.

Olkowski is one of the pioneers of a pest-control methodology termed “integrated pest management” (IPM) and its application for urban household settings.

IPM is a system of pest control that was developed in the 1940s and 1950s to help commercial agriculture combat pests without resorting to pesticides.

University of California biological specialists were asked by desperate cotton growers to help them overcome the ravages of the cotton boll worm. The worm had grown resistant to DDT, and the repeated DDT applications had killed off the beneficial insects that had controlled other pests, such as spider mites.

IPM consists of monitoring the insect population to determine if and when control is needed. Its strategies include physical, biological and mechanical means to keep the pest population low enough to prevent damage or annoyance. It calls for the use of least-toxic chemical controls only as a last resort.

William Olkowski studied under an IPM founder and was instrumental in adapting IPM methods to urban household situations.

“Most people live in urban areas in the United States, and the highest exposure to pesticides occurs in the cities,” Olkowski said.

Ninety-one percent of American households use pesticides in an all-out effort to keep cockroaches, fleas, ants and other insect intruders out of houses and apartments, according to Lifton’s research.

But besides the monetary cost of using these sprays, powders, liquids and the like, studies show that there’s a human toll. Every year, 20,000 people are treated in hospital emergency rooms for pesticide accidents, most of which take place in the home.

But how do homeowners keep cockroaches, ants, fleas, termites and other unwanted pests from invading their homes without poisoning themselves or harming the environment? IPM advocates say there are alternatives.

“For IPM to work, people need to know what the pest is, its behavior and habits, and how to utilize non-chemical controls,” said Michael Rust, a professor and vice chairman of the Entomology Department at UC Riverside.

Cockroaches are probably regarded as the most repulsive and persistent of all pest invaders. More than $1.5 billion is spent annually in the United States to spray roaches. But most of the spray methods don’t work, according to Walter Ebeling, a retired professor of entomology at UCLA.

“Roaches have either developed a resistance to chemical sprays or the sprays repel them and drive them farther into walls or crevices, only to emerge later unaffected by the spray,” Ebeling said.

Ebeling has spent years studying cockroaches, and determined that they can be controlled by habitat management, preventing them from obtaining food and water, and by selective application of boric acid.

“Boric acid is a centuries-old remedy that actually works since the roaches never developed a resistance to it.”

Recently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture published a study, “Ecology and Management of Food Industry Pests,” which found that a boric acid preparation sold as Roach Prufe showed 100% control in a three-month test. The field experimenters compared straight boric acid, proprietary boric acid formulations and insecticides used by pest control operators.

“Roach Prufe is so effective because the roaches are actually attracted to it and walk through it, coating themselves with the boric acid,” said Alan Brite, company president. “It was a case of serendipity. Dr. Ebeling consulted with us in formulating Roach Prufe, and at his recommendation, we added a substance that gave it a bitter taste so children and pets wouldn’t eat it.” Boric acid formulations are applied behind counters, appliances, water heaters and any warm place where roaches congregate. Once applied, it can be left safely in place.

Before using any preparation, be sure there’s enough of an infestation to require any type of control.

“If you see a roach scurrying across your kitchen floor, don’t just freak out and call the pest control company,” advised Sheila Daar, executive director of BIRC. “Monitor and observe the situation. This may be one adult roach . . . eliminating him may eliminate the problem.”

Monitoring is done by placing traps around the house in strategic locations. They can be purchased or homemade. Daar recommends a quart-size glass jar containing a piece of white bread. Coat the inside of the jar mouth with petroleum jelly. Set the jar upright in room corners. Roaches will fall into the jar to get the bait, but won’t be able to escape.

If there are any roaches in the trap, kill them with hot soapy water. By determining the average number of roaches per trap, you’ll have a means of determining if there is enough of a population to warrant eradication.

Traps also identify where the infestation is occurring. Many people assume that if roaches are present in one area, they’re everywhere in the room or building. Ebeling points out that the most common roach, the German cockroach, likes to congregate in specific areas, leaving them only to get food and water.

Caulking crevices can also reduce roach problems by eliminating their access to the human dwelling.

Termites are another source of problems. Ebeling also studied termite control, and found that heat and freezing treatments can be effective eradication methods.

“Heat penetrates into the wood, and termites are killed when temperatures reach 120 degrees or higher for up to eight hours,” he explained. “There’s no damage to the structure, the only drawback is the process currently costs twice as much as conventional fumigation.”

The freezing method consists of injecting liquid nitrogen into wood infested by drywood termites. This drops the temperature to minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit.

“Termites are 90% water, and their bodies crystallize at zero degrees Fahrenheit,” said Jay Tallon, owner of Tallon Inc.

Tallon developed “the blizzard system” in 1985, and obtained approval from the Environmental Protection Agency and registration from the Food and Drug Administration in 1988. To date, the system has been used on more than 4,000 houses and apartments.

The thermal treatment method is gaining acclaim as an alternative termite treatment method. There are six companies currently using this method in California.

“We’re treated more than 200 houses with the heat method, and we know it works very well,” said Bernie Asbell, of Structural Termite & Pest Control Co. in Riverside.

He cited labor fees as the reason for its higher cost.

“A crew must remain at the site for the eight hours it takes for the heat method,” he explained. “A fumigation crew can do four or five houses per day, so the operating costs are higher for the heat method.”

Another non-chemical termite method that’s gaining in popularity for drywood termite eradication is the microwave method. Microwave energy is converted to heat, killing termites and other insects infesting wood.

Steven Roy, of The Termite Inspector in Los Angeles, said his company has treated 3,000 dwellings with microwave energy and the response by homeowners is increasing steadily. Although higher costs deter some people, especially owners of single-family dwellings, the alternative methods can be cost-effective for apartment and condominium owners that may need to treat specific units.

“Any of these alternative methods requires greater ability to diagnose where the termite infestation is occurring and skilled technicians to do the eradication,” Roy said.

Homeowners seem satisfied with the results. According to Kay Cummins, consumer services representative for the Structural Pest Control Board, the agency received only three complaints about these alternative methods.

“We received 1,100 complaints in 1991, and almost all were lodged against companies using fumigation methods,” she said.

Despite the cost and labor factors, there are indications that nontoxic termite control measures will be used more and more frequently.

“The Environmental Protection Agency is already mandating that pest control applicators learn IPM as part of their certification process,” said Pat Morer, head of the IPM program at UC Davis.

Morer is a participant in a state-wide IPM program established in 1981 by the Legislature as a research and outreach program to encourage the reduction of pesticide use in California, primarily in the agriculture industry.

There’s also a bill pending in the state Legislature that would ban the use of highly toxic fumigants and other chemicals. Sponsored by Sen. Nicholas C. Petris (D-Oakland), the bill (SB-520) is aimed primarily at agriculture, but if it passes, homeowners would be affected since it would ban chemicals currently used in termite fumigation. The Assembly has already passed the bill, and the state Senate will vote this year.

For many people, one of the worst pests is fleas. Anyone with pet cats or dogs has probably suffered with flea infestations. But Morer cautions against the use of chemical flea control substances.

“All chemical flea control products are poisonous to the pets, and the process is further complicated if people use various chemicals at the same time,” he explained. “They interact and can cause severe problems.”

He cited the example of dogs under treatment for heartworms. “Animals receiving heartworm medication are already being given a toxic substance, and if they’re also treated with toxic flea control problems, they face severe health risks.”

He and other IPM practitioners offer the following nontoxic methods for flea control.

First, examine the pet to determine the actual flea infestation. Although some flea control experts claim fleas are only on the pet’s body for a short time, it’s possible to visually observe the number of fleas present and decide if the pet is actually infested.

If it is, bathe the pet with a nontoxic shampoo. Also launder the pet’s bedding. Vacuum the house thoroughly. Daily vacuuming is recommended at times of peak flea activity such as hot summer months. Steam cleaning carpets is also effective for killing larvae, eggs and adult fleas. Combing the pet with a special flea comb is another nontoxic method of flea control.

A number of pet owners report success with the application of pure diatomaceous earth (not swimming-pool grade, which contains crystalline silica, a potential respiratory hazard), which can be obtained through garden supply stores or by mail order; boric acid, or silica gel to carpets and furnishings. Insect growth regulators can also be sprayed on carpets and furnishings. These kill insects by interfering with their development process and are not harmful to mammals.

These methods may take several months to affect the flea populations. Because IPM method can take longer than conventional, fast acting poisons, some experts are critical of the effectiveness of IPM for indoor situations.

“One of the basic tenets of IPM is the reduction of pest populations to tolerable levels,” Rust said. “IPM is not really practical indoors where people won’t tolerate any insects.”

But Daar disagrees. “IPM can be very effective indoors if people are willing to take the time and effort for long-term solutions.”

Sources for Further Information

“Bug Busters: Poison-Free Pest Controls for Your House & Garden,” by Bernice Lifton, published in 1991 by Avery Publishing Group, $9.95, paperback.

“Common-Sense Pest Control: Least Toxic Solutions for Your Home, Garden, Pets and Community” by William Olkowski, Ph.D.: Sheila Daar and Helga Olkowski, published in 1991 by The Taunton Press. $39.95, hardcover.

Bio-Integral Resource Center, P.O. Box 7414, Berkeley, Calif. 94707, (510) 524-2567